510 replies to this topic

[Heffay]

ReXspec, on 09 July 2014 - 03:11 PM, said:

Here is the thing though, Void. Whether this is in a FPS format, or TT format, what people like Heffay are essentially suggesting is that you entirely remove random variables from shooting and make this game point-and-click.

Well, you haven't been paying attention then.

[Joseph Mallan]

Void Angel, on 09 July 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

I have two difficulties with the conclusions you're drawing here, I'm afraid. First, the sections cited, while interesting, don't give a description of what exactly the Battlemech's overall mobility is - "nimble" is a relative term - and are more concerned with the interplay between the Mechwarrior and the 'Mech's onboard computer.

More importantly, though, this reference illustrates why the tabletop rules - especially the flavor tex and fictional supplements - cannot be used as a reference - they often contradict each other. Here, you're telling me that a Battlemech is a learning computer that can be trained much like a Mechwarrior - but there is no support in the actual game rules for this flavor concept. No stat exists in any rulebook I know of for the quality of a 'Mech's DI computer; only the MechWarrior's skill is variable - even with Clan technology which is literally centuries in advance of the Inner Sphere (sorta.)

However, I think I need to clarify my point; see next response:


Battlemechs fulfill the battlefield role of super-tanks. They're designed, in tabletop, to feel like tanks - they can only torso twist one facing per ten seconds, for example. Just turning 180 degrees takes anywhere from 25% (Locust) to more than 50% (slowest Assaults. And Urbanmechs) of a 'Mech's allotted movement (per 10 second game turn.) This is a far cry from the highly mobile powered-armor feel of a Heavy Gear - because Heavy Gears take the role of super-infantry. So while BattleMechs can, should, and do exceed the mobility of even our modern armor (the Abrams' max landspeed over rough terrain without killing crewmembers or shattering its drive train is 48km/h,) they still need to retain the feel of being a huge armored war machine. The changes referenced in Win Ott's post, to which I was responding, deal with how current jump jet capabilities are breaking that feel, which is part of the reason PGI is making them.

To play Battletech is also to engage in retro-futurism. Remember, the Abrams didn't even begin line production until two years after BattleTech was published, and some of the capabilities it has today are the result of more modern upgrades. Much like the tragic lack delay of the personal jetpacks promised by 1960s futurists, BattleMech capabilities both exceed and fall short of expectations based on modern technology. Don't let the specifics get to you too much - it's simply part of the genre.

There is a planet in Canon where mods can be done to a Mech that will allow it to perform Gymnastics, Dance, and even play Baseball! I cannot remember the name of said planet, but I am sure someone here does.

Also Tanks are designed to feel like tanks, Mechs are designed to feel like Knights in Armor... It is why Many MechWarriors wear Spurs.

[ReXspec]

Heffay, on 09 July 2014 - 03:27 PM, said:

Well, you haven't been paying attention then.

Ohey, Heffay. You're back. Why'd you come back? I thought you were done with a plebeian like me?

Joseph Mallan, on 09 July 2014 - 03:27 PM, said:

There is a planet in Canon where mods can be done to a Mech that will allow it to perform Gymnastics, Dance, and even play Baseball! I cannot remember the name of said planet, but I am sure someone here does.

Also Tanks are designed to feel like tanks, Mechs are designed to feel like Knights in Armor... It is why Many MechWarriors wear Spurs.

Actually, there was a debate in the TT community as to what Battlemechs were supposed to be or feel like. Most agreed that the battlemech's were supposed to be heavy, (relatively) dexterous, tank-like weapons platforms with arms, legs, hands and feet. Although, I'm of the opinion that a battlemech's dexterity or manueverable depends highly on it's design, tonnage, and equipment.

Like, the example you brought up: I'm sure there are 'mechs that do those things. But I can't exactly see something like an Urban 'mech doing all that stuff because of it's design limitations.

That's the thing P.G.I. really isn't addressing: Design limitations.

Now, going back to the jump-sniper argument, most 'mechs CAN'T jump-snipe due to these limitations, hence, most pilots thought such a tactic was absurd. Even for the 'mechs that were designed or had a design conducive to jump-sniping (such as the Bushwacker or Shadowcat) such a maneuver was very difficult, if not impossible to pull off.

Edited by ReXspec, 09 July 2014 - 03:51 PM.

[DeathlyEyes]

The real issue is closing to range which is from terrain movement penalties. Scale back the movement penalties and you won't need to fiddle with the jump jets as much. Stop beating around the bush of bad map design and this terrible terrain movement penalty system.

[Joseph Mallan]

ReXspec, on 09 July 2014 - 03:40 PM, said:

Ohey, Heffay. You're back. Why'd you come back? I thought you were done with a plebeian like me?



Actually, there was a debate in the TT community as to what Battlemechs were supposed to be or feel like. Most agreed that the battlemech's were supposed to be heavy, (relatively) dexterous, tank-like weapons platforms with arms, legs, hands and feet. Although, I'm of the opinion that a battlemech's dexterity or manueverable depends highly on it's design, tonnage, and equipment.

Like, the example you brought up: I'm sure there are 'mechs that do those things. But I can't exactly see something like an Urban 'mech doing all that stuff because of it's design limitations.

That's the thing P.G.I. really isn't addressing: Design limitations.

Now, going back to the jump-sniper argument, most 'mechs CAN'T jump-snipe due to these limitations, hence, most pilots thought such a tactic was absurd. Even for the 'mechs that were designed or had a design conducive to jump-sniping (such as the Bushwacker or Shadowcat) such a maneuver was very difficult, if not impossible to pull off.

Did this debate take place on the CBT Forum? I am a member there but not active... And the if the musing was of the players, it doesn't count, unless a DEV said it. I loved the Heavy metal Pro forums cause we could debate from the perspective of Physicists. soldiers, Cops and beer drinking louts And have little grief.

I have since the 80s treated my Mechs like soldiers not tanks, cause Tanks are limited more by terrain than a soldier is... and Mechs can go where tanks only dream of. Also cause I was a Grunt.

Bushwackers don't jump, but your point is correct and one of the reasons was G forces IIRC.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 July 2014 - 04:03 PM.

[ReXspec]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 July 2014 - 04:02 PM, said:

I have since the 80s treated my Mechs like soldiers not tanks, cause Tanks are limited more by terrain than a soldier is... and Mechs can go where tanks only dream of. Also cause I was a Grunt.

Battlemechs, walkers, any bi-pedal war-machine presents a unique position on the battlefield. Like I said, they're really a mix as far as treatment on the battlefield goes. They can manuever like a soldier can, but control in a similar fashion to tanks and bring more firepower then a tank platoon.

Joseph Mallan, on 09 July 2014 - 04:02 PM, said:

Bushwackers don't jump, but your point is correct and one of the reasons was G forces IIRC.

They do if you put improved jj's on them and reinforce their legs. Which I have done. They make excellent jump snipers. The roll is still difficult, but I've managed to do it. Bushwackers are (relatively) easy to jump snipe with on TT.

Edited by ReXspec, 09 July 2014 - 04:33 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Kind of enjoying the back-and-forth here, but this caught my eye ...

ReXspec, on 09 July 2014 - 03:11 PM, said:

Here is the thing though, Void. Whether this is in a FPS format, or TT format, what people like Heffay are essentially suggesting is that you entirely remove random variables from shooting and make this game point-and-click. Which, if the game is advertising itself as a simulator, is simply absurd--not to mention it's false advertising, and should not be associated with the Mechwarrior name if that is the case.

I'm not sure that MWO was ever advertised as a simulator. 'Mech games, by their nature, are usually niche hybrid between skill-based (or "twitch, if you prefer) shooters and keyboard-and-mouse controlled simulators (HOTAS or other setups, while arguably the most immersive, have never been the "best" way to play MechWarrior games).

While there are some random aspects to the game (U-AC jam, internal damage when you over heat, critical hits, for example), their impact on the game is minimized compared to other risks. I would much rather get my cockpit blown out because I was stupid and the other guy was skilled (or good and lucky) than my random-number-generator rolled a critical fumble and the other guy's rolled a critical hit.

Believing that skill should ever be less important than luck or random numbers is (to use your term) simply absurd.

Quote

This most recent "rework" to jump jets is only a half-step in the right direction. It still doesn't make sense. As I said before, and as I quoted in a previous post, "(this system) is so far removed from actual Battletech, it may as well be Gundam."

I believe that this upcoming change is a step in the right direction ... that it will make the ability to jump high enough to clear full cover with enough time to locate a target, aim, and shoot accurately more rare and more costly in terms of either 'mech efficiency or risk. Jump sniping has it's place, but it should not be any more or less effective in most situations, on most maps, than any other technique.

Edit: Spelling

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 09 July 2014 - 04:50 PM.

[Fitzbattleaxe]

How does it make any sense whatsoever that jump height doesn't increase linearly with the number of jets? Until seeing that graph, it hadn't even occurred to me that it would be any other way, and I've been playing since closed beta. Just yet another unintuitive mechanic that's never explained anywhere, I guess.

[Heffay]

Fitzbattleaxe, on 09 July 2014 - 04:53 PM, said:

How does it make any sense whatsoever that jump height doesn't increase linearly with the number of jets? Until seeing that graph, it hadn't even occurred to me that it would be any other way, and I've been playing since closed beta. Just yet another unintuitive mechanic that's never explained anywhere, I guess.

Oh, it's obvious. The initial impetus is from the mech physically jumping. You can see this in the animation when you hit the space bar. The jets are there to help maintain the mech in the air, which is why it's not a linear increase. Well it is linear after the initial jump impetus.

Regular mechs don't jump without jump jets, as landing without them is practically impossible. Not worth the risk under any circumstance.

[Cimarb]

Heffay, on 09 July 2014 - 05:47 PM, said:

Oh, it's obvious. The initial impetus is from the mech physically jumping. You can see this in the animation when you hit the space bar. The jets are there to help maintain the mech in the air, which is why it's not a linear increase. Well it is linear after the initial jump impetus.

Regular mechs don't jump without jump jets, as landing without them is practically impossible. Not worth the risk under any circumstance.

You are reaching quite a ways on that, Heff. A mech does not jump on its own, period. Has nothing to do with landing, as there is no meaningful distance "jumped" without jets, so no risk involved.

[Zolaz]

So JJs are more important than CW and that is why it is being worked on? Or are JJs the new bottleneck for CW?

[Deathlike]

ReXspec, on 09 July 2014 - 03:06 PM, said:

That is the most hilarious non-sequitr I've ever seen.

For an O-4 you are exceedingly thick.

But I'll explain this to you again:

I made that analogy because I was comparing absurd tactics in the battletech universe (i.e. jump sniping) with absurd tactics that could be used in real life (i.e. rocket jumping with an AT-4).

The overriding point was that neither tactic should be used because they are absurd/difficult to pull off.

If you didn't catch that point the first time, then that is sad.

With that said, see ya later, "sir."

Enjoy your meta-build.

Rex, Heffay is a troll. If he disagrees with your point, he will dismiss it with no further real discussion.

Really, it's not worth that fight.

[Steinkrieg]

Does no one give a damn about the hard wired jump jets in Clan mechs? Or about my stomach? FOR SHAME.

[Cimarb]

Deathlike, on 09 July 2014 - 06:27 PM, said:

Rex, Heffay is a troll. If he disagrees with your point, he will dismiss it with no further real discussion.

Really, it's not worth that fight.

I think that is a little unfair. Disagreeing does not make you a troll. A troll instigates an argument just to argue, not because they believe differently. On top of that, they will make personal attacks often, which I do not think Heffay ever has (that I have seen, at least).

Steinkrieg, on 09 July 2014 - 06:35 PM, said:

Does no one give a damn about the hard wired jump jets in Clan mechs? Or about my stomach? FOR SHAME.

I have asked Russ about that a few times lately. I would like for fixed JJs to get a thrust buff quirk, or Omni JJs to get a thrust nerf quirk.

[Leigus]

IMO, jump jet height should start at a negative value for 1-2 jets (aka, they still output a constant thrust/jet, but you need a certain number of jets to overcome the mech's weight). Like so:




That way, mechs can no longer get away with mounting only 1-2 jump jets to poptart.

[YueFei]

Leigus, on 09 July 2014 - 07:12 PM, said:

IMO, jump jet height should start at a negative value for 1-2 jets (aka, they still output a constant thrust/jet, but you need a certain number of jets to overcome the mech's weight). Like so:




That way, mechs can no longer get away with mounting only 1-2 jump jets to poptart.

That is the correct way for JJs to behave.

[Heffay]

Cimarb, on 09 July 2014 - 06:15 PM, said:

A mech does not jump on its own, period.

Source?

(For the record, for every source you provide saying they don't, I'll provide one that says they do.)

[N0MAD]

Up until now i didnt know MWO had Vectored JJs, nice to know.
Also the comment about Jump sniping being a valid tactic, thats true if that tactic is to open up wallets.
Look at their team Tourny, finals featured what 90% + for $ mechs used by the top tier meta groups, these same top tiered meta groups are Runing more $ Clan mechs, why would you say you wanted to nerf J snipers and risk a back lash from the crowd thats buying their mechs with real $ to compete.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Now that I think about it, I would really like for non-jump jet 'mechs to be able to jump a little bit ... maybe just to "lower leg actuator" height.

It would help level the playing field just a little bit if the non-jump jet 'mechs could hop over minor obstacles like the seawall near epsilon on River City.

[Cimarb]

Heffay, on 09 July 2014 - 07:27 PM, said:

Source?

(For the record, for every source you provide saying they don't, I'll provide one that says they do.)

You do play the game still, right?

Hit the spacebar on a non-JJ mech and let me know if it jumps - but maybe I missed a patch where they added that...